FAST is Dead and technology companies killed it… TV was great as it was it just needed some efficiencies.
FAST: The Future of Television or the End of Content Creation?
FAST, which stands for Free Ad-Supported Television, is a streaming service that offers linear channels with curated content and advertisements.
Streaming TV platforms, such as Pluto TV, Roku, Peacock, and Tubi, have gained popularity in recent years as an alternative to subscription-based streaming services like Netflix, Hulu, and Disney+.
FAST channels work like traditional cable and satellite channels, but they are delivered over the Internet and can be watched on any device. FAST viewers can enjoy a variety of content genres, such as news, sports, entertainment, lifestyle, and more, without paying a monthly fee.
But while FAST may seem like a win-win situation for consumers and advertisers, some content creators and owners are worried about the impact of FAST on their revenues and rights. FAST platforms rely on licensing deals with content providers to fill their channels with programming.
However, these deals may not be as lucrative or fair as the ones offered by subscription-based streaming services or traditional broadcasters. Content providers may have to accept lower fees, shorter terms, or less control over their content in exchange for exposure on FAST platforms. Moreover, FAST platforms may not share enough data or insights with content providers about their audiences and performance.
Some content creators and owners are also concerned about the quality and originality of the content on FAST channels. FAST platforms may prioritize quantity over quality, resulting in a glut of low-budget, recycled, or outdated content that does not appeal to viewers or advertisers. FAST platforms may also lack the incentive or resources to invest in original or exclusive content that can differentiate them from their competitors. This may lead to a loss of creativity and diversity in the content landscape.
FAST Content owners and creators are sceptical
Therefore, some content creators and owners are sceptical about the future of FAST and its role in the television industry. They argue that FAST is not a sustainable or innovative model that can support the production and distribution of high-quality content. They claim that FAST is a threat to the value and integrity of their content and their ability to reach and engage their audiences.
However, others are more optimistic about the potential of FAST and its benefits for content creators and owners. Content owners believe that FAST is a complementary rather than a competing service that can expand the reach and visibility of their content. Content creators point out that Streaming TV can attract new or underserved audiences who are looking for free, easy-to-access, and diverse content options.
They also suggest that FAST can offer new opportunities for monetization, distribution, and collaboration for content creators and owners. They assert that FAST can foster innovation and experimentation in the content industry by providing a platform for emerging or niche genres, formats, and talents.
In conclusion, FAST is a rapidly growing phenomenon that is reshaping the television industry. It has advantages and disadvantages for consumers, advertisers, content creators, and owners. The future of FAST will depend on how these stakeholders adapt to the changing market dynamics and consumer preferences. FAST may be either the future of television or the end of content creation depending on how it evolves and performs in the coming years.
